« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Paul Ryan: 20% tipper.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  July 9th, 2011 at 12:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

(Background here.)

That’s pretty much the most important thing that you should take from neo-Puritan* Susan Feinberg’s decision to make a scene in a restaurant by accosting (drunkenly?) Rep. Paul Ryan‘s choice in alcoholic beverages (which he paid for on his personal card**): the man subscribes to the “20% is the new 15%” rule of tipping in this wonderful new economy that Reid, Pelosi, and (after 2008) Obama has wished upon us. Which I do myself. After all, aside from the aforementioned bad economy waitstaff don’t really have that great a job. I mean, at any point they may be called upon to… I don’t know, handle low rent, belligerent drunks who are accosting folks who are just trying to peacefully enjoy their dinners. You know. Trash behavior.

Out of curiosity, Susan Feinberg: how much did you tip your server? After all, as Mediate – MEDIATE, forsooth! – noted, you’re able to afford dinner at that restaurant, too.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

(Most links via Instapundit)

*”Neo-Puritan” because I suspect that Prof. Feinberg may lack some of the laudable qualities of the originals.

**For the record: I don’t care what they do in other – and usually lesser*** – countries, particularly the ones that are neo-socialist parasitic hellholes. In America a man is allowed and entitled to spend his own money on overpriced wine if he so chooses, and he should have a reasonable expectation of being permitted to do so in peace and quiet without having a neo-Puritan self-appointed political mutaween hassling him over it. If this is a problem for the Activist Left… move.

***While America is of course the greatest country in both the explored universe and in the historical record, there are nevertheless select nations that may be safely accorded status as being effectively equivalent in worth.

Tags: , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • msctex

    This actually is the best they can do.

    There is some comfort there.

  • Doc Holliday

    at least to put it on record.

  • Castor

    She?ll find it more than half empty!

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    saying.

  • Doc Holliday

    I don’t think I need to explain why

  • Flagstaff

    (now we have to put some text into “no text” comments?)

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    saying

  • billyd

    This is just another excuse to tell them to go scratch when the call me for an alumni donation.

  • Flagstaff

    At “drunkenly,”

    Among others lines by Ann Althouse, “All right then! Release the Feinbergs!

    Is this the oppo research of the future? What jackasses we are becoming!”

    Link through Amy Alkon’s Advicegoddess.com, “which he paid for on his personal card,” to another link to Matthew Hurtt

    http://matthewhurtt.com/paul-ryan-stimulates-economy-left-goes-wild/

    “Feinberg (CV and website) asserts her economics background once again. And she was outraged. For what? Because Ryan was spending money? money he had earned? FOR SHAME!

    What Feinberg and columnist Crabtree were really outraged about is Ryan?s political ideology. He?s conservative. That ? in and of itself ? is a crime.”

    And much, much more.

    I notice that in his source, Feinberg is quoted as saying “I was an economist….” Hmmm. I wonder why she’s forced to use the past tense? Perhaps because she understands nothing of economics? For just one point, doesn’t the Ryan group’s $700 purchase “stimulate the economy” a heck of a lot more than Feinberg’s half-bottle of muscatel? (Even more if she brought hers in in a brown paper bag.) And his 20% tip on his $400 share of the meal helped his server a bit more than her perhaps 10% tip on the wine and the surf-and-turf with the complementary birthday dessert. (Ms. Feinberg, if I’m wrong, prove it by giving us a photocopy of YOUR dinner receipt, and throw in your tax returns while you’re at it. We all know how tight liberals are with their own money.)

    And kudos to Tommy Christopher at another Mediaite link, “as Mediate[sic] ? MEDIATE[sic], forsooth! ? noted, you?re able to afford dinner at that restaurant, too.”

    The story is getting noticed, all right, but not the kind of notice Feinberg was hoping for. But she may have missed it all, anyway. Sometimes the mornings after can be rough.

    Rutgers, are you paying attention to what your professors are doing in their spare time? Not that I’m in favor of censorship by employer, but Feinberg displayed so many contra-economic beliefs in her little escapade that you might wonder if she’s qualified to teach any business course, at any level.

  • http://www.matthewhurtt.com Matthew Hurtt

    This was an incredibly fun post to write (the one over at my site). And folks like Moe Lane and others have really added a lot to this (non)story… that’s really become a story.

    I raise my glass of Franzia to you, Congressman Ryan.

  • Locke

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/263954/magic-moments-mutaween-mark-steyn

  • Doc Holliday

    .

  • Adjoran

    http://www.susanfeinberg.com/

  • Flagstaff

    I support the Leadership Institute, and graduates like you are the reason why.

    I like your website, too. Well done in all respects.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    If *I* don’t get to cause politically-motivated scenes in restaurants and airports, then neither should anybody else. :)

  • rightwingmom52

    and ask her what her dinner cost and how much she tipped.

    She has her own website at http://www.susanfeinberg.com/
    and her email is listed.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    It’s one of those things that you almost have to hit. :)

  • Flagstaff

    or at least about her writing.

    At her website is a link to her “new chapter on Location Theory in the Princeton Encyclopedia of the World Economy! (2007).” I read the chapter, and I admit it contains nuggets of probably accurate information, but it’s hidden in undergrad-level research-paper prose. Short choppy sentences. Assertion after assertion. They march across the page interrupted only by periods. Not writing that I’d want to read very much of. Insert tons of economic jargon and you will see what I mean.

    On another level, it was an interesting exercise. Although the chapter was written in 2007, she mentions specifically some unique characteristics that industries similar to airplane manufacturing bring to the question of where they should locate production plants. She refers to some work by Paul Krugman, and she does so in relation to the question of what “policymakers” (governments) can do to “enhance the attractiveness of their locations and thus, increase the likelihood multinational [or any] firms will decide to choose” their location.

    Switching to references in Michael Porter’s “Competitive Advantage of Nations (1998),” she cites his conclusion that “increased spending on education and R&D, government spending on infrastructure…, etc.”, having the goal of “improving the quality of domestic factors of production such as labor and capital”, are factors “deployed across may different sectors, [so they are more cost-efficient policies than] policies that merely seek to redistribute the location of existing economic activity.” That is, it’s cheaper to create an attractive climate for business and people in general than it is to bribe individual companies to move to your country.

    More fully developed, this is a POWERFUL argument against the Obama administration’s use of the NLRB to prevent Boeing from developing its business in South Carolina. South Carolina has done exactly what Porter suggested by creating a business climate that has attracted Boeing to that state. To try to force Boeing to develop that business in Washington state is ludicrous, and definitely not conducive to profitable business, the cornerstone of a prosperous economy.

    But I’m not even sure that Feinberg realizes what she wrote. If she did, she’d be petitioning the NLRB to drop its action against Boeing. Too bad.

  • Pirohy

    but it can resonate with the “swing voters”.
    Christie really took a hit for flying a helicopter to his son’s soccer game. I still hear people complaining about that, including quite a few that voted for him.

  • Flagstaff

    the swift response exposing both the hypocrisy and the wrong-headedness of Feinberg’s attack was appropriate, necessary and effective.

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    but today, you have outdone yourself: even your footnotes have footnotes.

    Bravo!

  • blooch

    Is he getting kickbacks on his pricey purchase?

    http://www.beverageworld.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38380&catid=3&Itemid=173

  • eldstenorge

    is the greatest. I so appreciate him and how hard he works to help us understand what has to be done, whether we may like it all or not.

  • doncorleone

    Having been a waiter and a bartender in three peoples’ republics in the 10 years I spent in the restaurant business. Liberals for the most part tip in the same way as they feel about taxes, they’re very loose w/other people’s money.

  • Next93

    Playing to stereotype, Ms Feinberg seemed to be almost as offended that a $350 bottle was on the menu as she was at the fact that some rich people were drinking it (Do you suppose she’d be ok if poor people were drinking it?).

    Given the fact that she also ordered a bottle in the same restaurant, she apparently beleives that *she* should be the arbiter of how much anyone should be allowed to pay for a bottle of wine, and by corollary, how much can be charged for a bottle of wine.

    I beleive this sort of thinking is an inevitable evolution of the notion that the purpose of civilization is to make the world “fair”. Once you start down that line of thinking, you eventually get to the idea that unfairness is a form of opression caused by letting people make thier own decisions, and the only way we can truly be free is to allow the government to control every aspect of our lives.

    A few other observations:
    1) I find it interesting that an “economist” gives no thought to what would happen to all of the people on the value chain for this bottle of wine if her vision of a fair world were to come to pass.

    2) I also find it interesting that she talks about a two earner family making minimum wage. I might be wrong here, but I don’t beleive minimum wage was intended to be at a level to support a family.

    3) How about this for a thought-experiment; what would have happened if this had been a religious conservative who berated a US Representative for drinking (never mind the cost)?

  • Pingback: hier